No, seriously, its the best. Its like I have a superhuman ability to predict the political future. While I recognize that with great power comes great responsibility, I have no problem shirking that responsibility in favor of juvenile gloating. And so I will:

Ha HA! I was right. And it feels so, so good.

I suppose youre wondering what Im talking about. I guess Ill let you in on it. In the spring, I wrote an article here discussing the arguments heard in Federal Election Commission v. Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc., a Supreme Court case testing the constitutionality of a specific provision of the McCain-Feingold campaign reform bill. That bill was of course written by current GOP nominee hopeful John McCain. That provision made it illegal for non-profit organizations to broadcast issue ads that were targeted at specific candidates for office. In my (typically excellent) article, I wrote:

Subrosa will bet you a fiver that if this loophole in McCain-Feingold is blown open that John McCain and his supporters will take advantage of it more than will any other candidate.

A few months later, the Court, as I predicted, struck down the provision. In a confusing opinion that ignored very recent precedent, the Court held that non-profit advertisers could target any candidate they wanted so long as the advertisement could not reasonably be interpreted to be a direct appeal to voters.

Its now a few months even later and were now in the heat of the primary season. So guess which candidate was the first to have one of these new types of ads run in his favor?

Dun, dun, DUUUUUUUUUUN.

Thank you, thank you. I know I rule, but please hold your applause until I finish.

The ad was sponsored by a group called the Foundation for a Secure and Prosperous America. It is also available for viewing on their website. It features glowing praise of our soldiers, McCain, and Republican Senator Lindsay Graham. It does the classic political ad black-and-white unflattering photos with scary music tactic with Nancy Pelosi and no-name Democratic representative David Obey of Wisconsin, essentially accusing them of hating our troops. All in all, its pretty typical campaign stuff. Except that unlike those typical campaign ads you see, the Foundation for a Secure and Prosperous America does not have to disclose who is funding them. They do not have to include a statement of responsibility from the candidates represented. This is because they are taking advantage of that loophole in McCain-Feingold created by FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life. Yippee!

As the New York Times points out, theres something fishy going on here.

The so-called Wounded Warriors Act, legislation intended to improve health care for veterans, has attracted nearly unanimous, bipartisan support in Congress. So why would the newly formed Foundation for a Secure and Prosperous America begin running a television commercial urging the citizens of South Carolina to tell Congress to pass it?

The answer lies in the commercials glowing images of Senator John McCain, the Arizona Republican banking on a South Carolina victory to jump-start his cash-poor Republican primary campaign. The group that paid for the advertisement operates independently of Mr. McCains campaign, but was set up and financed by his supporters seeking to help him as much as possible up to the limits of the law.

The initial spending on the commercial, according to the group, is modest commercials on the Fox News Channel in South Carolina only but it represents the first trickle in a flood of hundreds of millions of dollars that are expected to pour from all sides into groups reminiscent of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth of 2004, built to influence voting outside of campaign law limitations. The amount could swamp the record-breaking tens of millions that the top candidates are raising for their own, closely regulated campaign accounts.

Mr. McCain has crusaded for years against just this sort of unencumbered political spending and has publicly called upon the foundation to stop the advertisement, a request competitors say seems half-hearted and the groups leader has ignored.

Thanks to a recent decision by the Supreme Court, most of these groups, including the McCain-friendly foundation, will be able to operate with even less public disclosure than such entities did in 2004.

So, to sum up: McCains supporters set up a sham non-profit (a 501(c)4, for those of you who care about citations) to run ads outside campaign finance laws that he set up and that paint him in his most positive light. Meanwhile, McCain himself gets to deny a connection because those supporters dont have to disclose any such connection. The ads get to run unfettered.

Now, its possible that McCain is actually telling the truth and indeed doesnt want an ad like this to run in his favor. He could be earnestly pissed off that someone pushing his candidacy would so brazenly flaunt the rules that he would like people to live by. Who are these rapscallions he must be bellowing, and how dare they sully my good Christian name?!

That could be the case. Except for this one juicy little nugget of information:

[The Foundation for a Secure and Prosperous America] was started by Rick Reed, whose firm helped produce the 2004 Swift Boat advertisements that questioned Senator John Kerrys war record in a way that Democrats, and even Mr. McCain, said was unfair but, also, in a way that both sides agree did great damage to Mr. Kerrys presidential campaign. Mr. Reed is also a long-time strategist for Mr. McCain, working for his 2000 presidential campaign and briefly for his 2008 campaign, before it ran short on money and trimmed its operations.

Well if that dont just beat all. Im shocked, I say. Shocked!

See, it turns out that because McCain cant raise money the normal way, this is the only shot hes got to stay in the race. The scary thing is that it appears to be working.

Republican John McCain, climbing in polls but lagging in money, is negotiating a $3 million loan while some of his backers launch an independent advertising effort seemingly at odds with his years of fighting outside influence in campaigns.
[]
Once considered the GOP front-runner, McCain found himself all but broke and languishing in polls at summer's end. As fall began, his fortunes improved, and he now senses opportunity, particularly in New Hampshire and South Carolina.

The compressed primary calendar has increased pressure on his campaign to capitalize on his improved standing and spend heavily on television ads. The Iowa caucuses are scheduled for Jan. 3 and could be followed promptly by the New Hampshire primary. Michigan is considering holding a primary Jan. 15, followed by South Carolina on Jan. 19.

McCain ended the third quarter of the year with $3.5 million, $1.7 million of which was available for the primaries. He also reported a debt of $1.7 million.

He's been running ads in New Hampshire, recently expanding to the expensive Boston market, but he has been unable to afford to go on the air in South Carolina, though advisers say he will soon. The campaign is also conducting direct mail campaigns in Iowa and New Hampshire.

Aides and fundraisers for McCain said the campaign now is raising money faster than it is spending it.

McCains poll numbers in many early primary states have jumped over the past few weeks, as hes cut the lead Giuliani once had on him in half. Whereas before that would not have mattered because he would not have been able to outspend other candidates, now he doesnt have to worry about those pesky campaign laws and his buddies can do the work for him. Everybody wins!

Of course, in the interest of fairness, this is a loophole that will be exploited extensively by both sides. George Soros has already set up organizations to do this for Democratic candidates as well. Personally, I dont even mind the practice too much (though I think the organizations should have to disclose their donors). However, the irony in the fact that the first shot in the 501(c)4 war was fired across the bow by McCains boys is just out-fucking-standing.

But more important than all of that is the inescapably glorious truth: I was right.

Again.

Yalls owe Subrosa a fiver.

Toku666

Columbus, OH

May 2004

NOV 17, 2007 12:11 AM

I'd never bet against ya.

It's just more sad that you were right than anything else. Unfortunately not terribly surprising that it panned out like this.

KitsuneLuvsYuki

Columbia, MO

January 2005

NOV 17, 2007 12:22 AM

I don't have a five on me, but here's a kiss
will that do for payment?

_panda_

I'm lost

November 2005

NOV 17, 2007 06:39 AM

im gunna pay a friend a few bucks to post his unbiased opinion of subrosa in this thread under the guise of SGs for a better newswire.

priapos

San Angelo, TX

October 2005

NOV 17, 2007 06:52 AM

I have started to seriously look at public financing for campaigns. I don't have a problem with them bashing or trashing each other. I just dislike the trading of favors and the convoluted methods of financing as described above. It feels weird for me to talk about expanding govt. power, but the current situation doesn't work, and the alleged fixes don't work either.

captainoblivious

Austin, TX

August 2005

NOV 17, 2007 07:10 AM

Politics - the grand art of selling out for maximum fun and profit. Impress your friends! Completely devastate your enemies! Make a complete and total ass of yourself and pray that your blinds and kickbacks are enough to cover the sordid trail of shit your several missteps onto others' toes left behind!

The system is broken. Honest guys with level-headed policies can't even get into the game because they have to fight desperate, catty, self-interested douche bags like McCain. The SCOTUS is just scaring me these days with their increasingly erratic behavior that is permanent until a President with God damned common sense appoints a judge that is much the same. Of course, that guy won't get elected, and guys like that make lousy appointees.

Does anyone else ever feel like the goal of the modern American politician is to play chicken with screwing everyone who isn't them while staying in that position?